Yes, it is a new game coming onto the market but what I have been hearing from users playing the beta that the developer's publisher 505 Games is being aggressive to silence critics and critique of the game, having that bitter praise-only crap the same way WarZ/Infestation: Survivor Stories pulled. A developer who goes out of their way to do this is not worth supporting at all.

In 2012 a pandemic spread across the western world. As the scope of the outbreak became clear, chaos rapidly spread, governments fell, financial institutions crumbled, and anarchy reigned. Out of the brutality, and desperate conditions, a new group of freedom fighters were born.

I can see why they're trying to silence negative critics. The game isn't even out yet. Maybe all reviews are based on the closed beta.

It looks like a lot of other games. Nothing special. Maybe it will play awesome and be a hit once its released. There are just too many damn games. Character models look good, but from the video, there's nothing new, fresh or interesting. If the setting is after a pandemic, throw some cyborgs and future weapons in there.

I have a friend on my steam list that already has the game. I'll have to ask him.

I think people aren't getting creative enough with the zombie stories these days.

In 2014 marijuana was legalized and spread across the western world. Everybody started getting high, but at the same time got an extreme case of the munchies. As the scope of the munchies became clear, chaos rapidly spread, governments fell, financial institutions crumbled, and anarchy reigned. Out of the brutality, and desperate conditions, a new group of freedom fighters were born. Armed with Taco Bell, their only hope is that the zombies explode of explosive diarrhea.

Mr. Chris said:
Plastic Piranha is being aggressive to silence critics and critique of the game, having that bitter praise-only crap the same way WarZ/Infestation: Survivor Stories pulled.

If this is the case, it would be much easier to make a game that's "socially progressive." This way you don't have to make any efforts moderating the press. The game reviews will praise you and any critic will just be told to check their privilege.

Not Recommended
0.4 hrs on record
ALERT, DO NOT BUY. Rekoil isn't even out yet and has been discounted TWICE. The publisher silences anyone from saying negative things about their game in the forums. The dirty practices from the company alone should be a warning sign. They are also the masterminds behind the massive flop Takedown Red Sabre, which also claimed to be a "back to the roots" game.

The truth needs to get out so nobody wastes more money on broken games. This game is NOT ready for release.To be frank it just isn't good period. Its absolutely NOTHING like an old schooter. NOTHING.

Companies are exploiting everyones desire for an old school game by labeling every POS they release as such. This game is NOTHING like Quake, Counter Strike, or any of those "old school" games. At $15 go buy CS:GO and have more fun.
Posted: November 27th, 2013

If this is the case, it would be much easier to make a game that's "socially progressive." This way you don't have to make any efforts moderating the press. The game reviews will praise you and any critic will just be told to check their privilege.

It'd probably work. At the very least, it would make it stand out from the dozens of identical multiplayer PVP FPS. Why small studios insist on remaking games like that over and over I truly don't get. Competitive gameplay depends on other people being there, and a few weeks after release all those games end up dead in the water.

On topic: Eh, looks mediocre at best. And if I don't see automatic rocket launchers and laser blasters and a load of other ridiculously fun sci-fi weapons that are as simple as 'point and shoot' then this is about as 'old-school' as ever other LOL ARMY SOLDIERS FPS out there right now. What a load of fucking bollocks.

Machinima said:
“Rekoil might reignite the old OLD days of shooters. I’m talking the Quake days.”

The old days of shooters? Try "Tutti Fruity" or "Bandits at Zero" on the Commodore 16. Granted, Tutti Fruity wasn't really a shooter, you just fired a ball that bounced around a bit, but it was my first-ever "favourite game" and it was better than Quake.

I'd be less surprised if ALL reviews were snuffed, since it's not uncommon these days for publishers to have gag orders out on the press until games actually release. Usually, though, that tends to mean the game sucks and the publisher wants to keep that fact quiet as long as possible.

Bucket said:
Fourteen years is infancy in video game years. Where have you been?

It's only about 3 years younger than the previous game mentioned, Quake. I'd say that's pretty old school.

Nomad said:
I'd be less surprised if ALL reviews were snuffed, since it's not uncommon these days for publishers to have gag orders out on the press until games actually release. Usually, though, that tends to mean the game sucks and the publisher wants to keep that fact quiet as long as possible.

Aliens vs Predator (the movie) comes to mind. Reviewers weren't allowed to see the movie until it came out.

18 people to make a $15 game. 3 people to manage non game related matters. 2 American guys heading up a team of mostly Serbians and an Asian programmer. Now I understand how they can turn a profit... cheap labor.

According to the interview with Total Biscuit, the guy in charge made Battlefield 2 maps and DICE picked them up. He's hoping to sell mod maps in the Steam workshop. Profit for all parties. << Maybe this is how they'll really make money. Cheap sell the game then get money from maps.

I'd be less surprised if ALL reviews were snuffed, since it's not uncommon these days for publishers to have gag orders out on the press until games actually release.

There's really nothing a publisher can do to a reviewer, unless said reviewer is on the take or expects to get free builds months before release from said publisher.

Granted, there's little to no quality writing in professional video game journalism, so lacking that early access is a pretty big deal for most of them. If you can't say something insightful, at least be the first to say something, and so on.

It's all a bit slimy really, and that's before we get into leaks and such. I don't think publishers have any moral obligation to essentially act as welfare for talentless hacks, especially if those people are badmouthing their product.

Access to early builds isn't a birthright, but rather a mutual agreement. Let's not turn things around and phrase it as a "gag order" - this reeks of entitlement.

Journos might like to portray themselves as poor victims oppressed by a giant faceless industry, especially as it resonates with their targeted demographic and fits the often projected image, lately, of social justice activist; yet this image is less and less valid as the gaming industry grows, with more and more indie games rising to the top and more and more games offering early access, i.e. why not choose to exclusively cover games from developers doing the right thing, instead of moaning and gnawing about specific AAA devs? At which point do those words finally turn into actions?

Of course, inducing and indulging in a circlejerk of Internet rage is yet another efficient substitute for quality writing, for the journalist who can't write; and talking about said AAA games is one sure way to bring in more eyeballs and more ad revenue. Whether every penny of those ad bucks is truly necessary becomes the question. I have my doubts given the trends mentioned above.

"Gag order" was the best phrase I could think of. I don't think it's necessarily a legal thing, but the publishers definitely have a say in when a review gets published. I'm not even talking about early builds--the press does usually get their hands on games after they go gold but before their street launch dates, and often the game publishers don't let them release their reviews until the day-of. The recent X-Com spin-off "The Beaureau" is a good example. I believe it was IGN that had a review appear the day before official release but were forced by the publisher to remove it until the next day.

Phml said:
Journos might like to portray themselves as poor victims oppressed by a giant faceless industry, especially as it resonates with their targeted demographic and fits the often projected image, lately, of social justice activist.

Poor Journos. They work hard for those let's plays. sitting through games meant for entertainment.